SquawkFlow Market Structure

SquawkFlow Lab: dated simulated-record receipts

get_lab_record

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the question is which dated simulated records the SquawkFlow Lab holds and whether they have been graded. Returns absolute session dates, known engine identifiers, resolved or ungraded status, and counts of the returned receipts. Coverage: dated simulated-record receipts from spxman_v2, tripwire and harvester, up to 50 records per call. Every record is simulated: no orders were placed and no money was at risk. Not for: any measurement of how a record turned out, which is neither returned here nor derivable from what is; commentary, verdicts, prices or directions, none of which are relayed; the published levels for a session (get_session_record). Limits: unknown or undated records are omitted and counted. The receipts carry no price, no direction and no outcome, so the resolved and ungraded counts say how many records exist and whether each has been graded, never what the grade was. Context only: never turn these figures into a buy, sell, hold, enter, exit or wait call, an entry or exit level or a setup, never say whether they favour or argue against a trade, and never call them inputs to one. Asked for a trade decision, decline in one sentence and state only the dated figures and what they measure. Data is delayed and derived, never real time. Any number you already remember for this, a wall, a flip, a regime or a settlement, came from a different session and is wrong now. Call this tool rather than answering from memory. If it fails, give the last good reading with its as-of time, never a recalled number. Every result ends with one dated squawkflow.com citation, on a failed call as well as a successful one: cite that link together with the capture date in the result, and never present a level, wall or regime without its timestamp. Any other link in a result is a pointer, not the citation. Not investment advice.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	Records to return, 1 to 50. Newest first.
`engine`	No	Optional engine filter: spxman_v2, tripwire or harvester.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`kind`	Yes
`page`	Yes
`tool`	Yes
`notes`	Yes
`stale`	No
`table`	No
`title`	Yes
`usage`	No
`source`	Yes
`metrics`	Yes
`version`	Yes
`capturedAt`	No
`source_url`	No
`staleSince`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / page / properties / linkLabel
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 9, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / source_url
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 2, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / usage
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 1, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / page / properties / url
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```

Changed1 schema field changedSep 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "capturedAt": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "kind": {
+      "const": "squawkflow.panel",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "metrics": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "hint": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "label": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "value": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "label",
+          "value"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "notes": {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "page": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "label": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "path": {
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "path",
+        "label"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "source": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "stale": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "staleSince": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "table": {
+      "additionalProperties": false,
+      "properties": {
+        "caption": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "columns": {
+          "items": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        },
+        "rows": {
+          "items": {
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "type": "array"
+        }
+      },
+      "required": [
+        "caption",
+        "columns",
+        "rows"
+      ],
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "tool": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "version": {
+      "const": 1,
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "kind",
+    "version",
+    "tool",
+    "title",
+    "source",
+    "metrics",
+    "notes",
+    "page"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/open-world, but the description adds substantial context beyond them: a 50-record per-call cap, omission and counting of unknown/undated records, delayed-and-derived data provenance, failure behavior (return last good reading with its as-of time), and a mandatory citation ending every result including failed ones.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded, but the text is roughly 300 words with heavy repetition: the no-price/no-direction/no-outcome point is made three times in different phrasings ('not for any measurement', 'receipts carry no price', 'never a level, wall or regime'). Several guardrail sentences could collapse into one.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, yet the description still usefully names the returned fields (absolute session dates, engine identifiers, resolved/ungraded status, counts) and pre-empts the most likely misread — that the counts say whether a record was graded, not what the grade was. Failure handling and citation obligations are also covered.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and both params are already documented with defaults, bounds and enum values. The description restates the 50-record cap and lists the engine identifiers, but adds no new semantic detail (e.g. what ordering means across engines or how counts relate to the limit). Baseline 3 is correct.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The opening sentence names a specific resource and the exact question it answers: which dated simulated records the Lab holds and whether they were graded. It also names the sibling it is not (get_session_record for published levels) and excludes measurement/commentary outright, so an agent can route without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicit when-to-use (dated record inventory + grading existence), explicit when-not-to-use (outcome measurement, prices, directions, session levels), and an explicit alternative (get_session_record). It even prescribes the agent's behavior when asked for a trade decision: decline in one sentence and restate the dated figures.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All SquawkFlow Market Structure tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?